Four cables into one single socket

[Itisonlyme]

Hi all, I am continuing to replace all the sockets and switches in the house and as always the very last one is a bit of a headache.

Single socket on the landing to one side of an airing cupboard. On removing the faceplate in addition to the expected two cables for the ring there are two more runs of 2.5mm t+e. One of these cables has been fed in front of the back box rather than through the knockout which sets alarm bells ringing to me as it seems likely only a cowboy or homeowner with no pride would do this, this seems a later addition to the other 3 cables so could be diy.

i replaced the backbox with a deeper one to provide a better fit to the wall as its attached to a joist to the rear and a 25mm box isn't deep enough to reach the wall, added grommets as none fitted and run all four set of cables through knockouts.

I have a couple of questions:

1. Is this an acceptable arrangement in any event? As two cables are the ring and two others are feeding off it (assumed but not yet tested as had to pop out). Would need a trip into the loft to work out what they are feeding. If they are both spurs I believe only one is allowed and I would look to disconnect the other if not permitted. One may be a socket which is unused by us at least as it is inside the airing cupboard and would be no loss.

2. Assuming this is an OK arrangement trying to get 4 lots of wire into the terminals on the back of an MK single socket sounds a big ask, can I group the cables into 30amp connector block and then feed a single wire into the socket terminal? Don't like this idea much as I would think poorly if I took the socket off and found this arrangement.

Grateful of any advice.

Phil

 

[davesparks]

I know without looking that the total number of unfused spurs must not exceed the number of points on the ring.

I'm struggling to think if I've ever come across a regulation that says you can't connect two spurs from the same point.

It is definately bad practice and far from an ideal situation

 

[Deleted member 9648]

I know without looking that the total number of unfused spurs must not exceed the number of points on the ring.

I'm struggling to think if I've ever come across a regulation that says you can't connect two spurs from the same point.

It is definately bad practice and far from an ideal situation

I have already stated that it is not ideal,but the inference in all of the posts so far is that it does not comply with regulations,I believe that is incorrect unless someone can show me otherwise.
I also believe that after an assessment of loadings such an arrangement would not necessarily need altering.

 

[Pete999]

I know without looking that the total number of unfused spurs must not exceed the number of points on the ring.

I'm struggling to think if I've ever come across a regulation that says you can't connect two spurs from the same point.

It is definately bad practice and far from an ideal situation

As I said not got regs handy OSG page 68 has some reference, if there is no reg stating what you say is true, it's not something I would contemplate doing imo it's not just bad practice it's a hazard as well.
"A non fused spur feeds only one twin socket or one permanently connected item of electrical equipment. Such a spur is connected to a circuit at the terminals of a socket outlet or at junction boxes or at the origin of the circuit at the DB"

 

[Deleted member 9648]

As I said not got regs handy OSG page 68 has some reference, if there is no reg stating what you say is true, it's not something I would contemplate doing imo it's not just bad practice it's a hazard as well.
"A non fused spur feeds only one twin socket or one permanently connected item of electrical equipment. Such a spur is connected to a circuit at the terminals of a socket outlet or at junction boxes or at the origin of the circuit at the DB"

Agree...Each spur must be as stated....but it does not state that only one spur can be fed from a single point on a RFC.
Lets say that one spur feeds a single socket in the loft for a tv amp..(0.5a)....and the second a twin socket in a bedroom with a table lamp and alarm clock (1a). Would you insist to a client that such an arrangement did not comply with the regulations and was a potential danger which had to be rewired? It would be hard to justify IMO.

 

[SPARTYKUS]

I see this alot. Its always the single gang socket on the landing that gets the kicking.

I bet one of the spurs feeds a security light, and the other is for a trouser press in the wardrobe that backs onto the single socket :laugh:

 

[markc123]

As I said not got regs handy OSG page 68 has some reference, if there is no reg stating what you say is true, it's not something I would contemplate doing imo it's not just bad practice it's a hazard as well.
"A non fused spur feeds only one twin socket or one permanently connected item of electrical equipment. Such a spur is connected to a circuit at the terminals of a socket outlet or at junction boxes or at the origin of the circuit at the DB"

I agree with you Pete, but wirepuller is correct - theres no reg.

I had this disagreement on a job a while back and was put in my place. Every days a school day.

I, like you, would still not advise it though.

 

[Pete999]

Agree...Each spur must be as stated....but it does not state that only one spur can be fed from a single point on a RFC.
Lets say that one spur feeds a single socket in the loft for a tv amp..(0.5a)....and the second a twin socket in a bedroom with a table lamp and alarm clock (1a). Would you insist to a client that such an arrangement did not comply with the regulations and was a potential danger which had to be rewired? It would be hard to justify IMO.

There probably isn't any direct regulation that says "thou shalt not try and stick 4 2.5mm conductors into the terminals of a 13 amp socket" from the post on this subject it appears that we all agree that it's not good practice to do this, to get back to your scenario, 0.5 amps for a TV booster, I wouldn't bother wiring a spur from the RFC i would connect it to the upstairs lighting via a, fused spur, am I being pedantic over this? probably yes for several reason: it's bad practice, the sockets and the boxes are not really designed to accept 4 cables, and lastly I think it;s inherently dangerous to try and do this, think of the stress put on the cables and terminations when to you try and cram all those cables into the box? lets not get into a protracted argument we are all, after all skilled Electricians, at least I hope we are, and out of choice and professionalism we should not install sockets this way, no reg well OK, that's all I'm out.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

There probably isn't any direct regulation that says "thou shalt not try and stick 4 2.5mm conductors into the terminals of a 13 amp socket" from the post on this subject it appears that we all agree that it's not good practice to do this, to get back to your scenario, 0.5 amps for a TV booster, I wouldn't bother wiring a spur from the RFC i would connect it to the upstairs lighting via a, fused spur, am I being pedantic over this? probably yes for several reason: it's bad practice, the sockets and the boxes are not really designed to accept 4 cables, and lastly I think it;s inherently dangerous to try and do this, think of the stress put on the cables and terminations when to you try and cram all those cables into the box? lets not get into a protracted argument we are all, after all skilled Electricians, at least I hope we are, and out of choice and professionalism we should not install sockets this way, no reg well OK, that's all I'm out.

Just to clarify I have never advocated installing this way. The OP has an existing socket wired in this fashion and has been informed that it needs to be re-jigged as two spurs from one point is unacceptable. IMO that is not necessarily correct.

 

[Slowhand]

You can argue the semantics of this forever but what would you rather do?

a) Keep trying to prove that this scenario is ok because the BGB doesn't specifically say that it isn't.

b) Sort it out using common sense and good working practices.

Even ( if this makes you happier ) resort to manufacturers instructions and get in touch with the tech dept of the socket maker and ask if they recommend stuffing 4 X 2.5 T&E in the back of one of their sockets.

The BGB isn't a law written in stone it's a standard we must not fall below.
If you're not sure, Always err on the side of safety.

 

[Deleted member 9648]

You can argue the semantics of this forever but what would you rather do?

a) Keep trying to prove that this scenario is ok because the BGB doesn't specifically say that it isn't. Or as is the case on this thread make up your own regulations,remember the OP has been specifically informed that this is not allowed.That information is factually incorrect.

b) Sort it out using common sense and good working practices.Agreed...which could be as post 19 or if the two spurs are likely to be loaded then rewire as a ring.Common sense.

Even ( if this makes you happier ) resort to manufacturers instructions and get in touch with the tech dept of the socket maker and ask if they recommend stuffing 4 X 2.5 T&E in the back of one of their sockets. Why do that when 4 x 2.5mm solid conductors will fit into a decent socket terminal no problem at all.

The BGB isn't a law written in stone it's a standard we must not fall below.
If you're not sure, Always err on the side of safety.

................

 

[Slowhand]

^^^^^ I think you missed the point of what I was saying ^^^^^

 

[Deleted member 9648]

^^^^^ I think you missed the point of what I was saying ^^^^^

Still missing it in that case!:icon12:

 

[Slowhand]

It's back to arguing semantics then...

 

[Itisonlyme]

Wow....I do believe I may have kicked a hornets nest

Many thanks for all your posts, most informative.

So there is no reg that says this cannot be done, but as I am looking to upgrade the electrics in line with best practice and consensus is that this is not a good way of going about things I will not be leaving it as is.

If nothing else it is a pig to get all that copper in those tiny connections and if the spurs are unused and running to places no sane person would consider convenient I see no need to leave them in. Once all four sets of connections are made there is considerable mechanical strain required to get it back on the wall which isn't right IMHO as it seems at least possible that the required force will overcome the clamping force of a tiny screw.

This house has a number of unusual plug points e.g bedroom wall double socket over 6 ft off the floor, maybe a previous TV location but no aerial point.

Thanks again

 

[Slowhand]

^^^^ He found it and that's what's important. ^^^^^

Still missing it in that case!:icon12: